Skip to content

Conversation

@hbrunn
Copy link
Member

@hbrunn hbrunn commented Aug 2, 2016

forward port of #489

@hbrunn hbrunn added this to the 9.0 milestone Aug 2, 2016
@dreispt
Copy link
Member

dreispt commented Aug 2, 2016

👍

[auth_supplier](auth_supplier/) | 9.0.2.0.0 | Auth Supplier
[base_custom_info](base_custom_info/) | 9.0.1.0.0 | Add custom field in models
[base_multi_image](base_multi_image/) | 9.0.1.0.0 | Allow multiple images for database objects
[base_multi_image](base_multi_image/) | 9.0.1.1.0 | Allow multiple images for database objects
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI the section [//]: # (addons) is auto-generated you don't need add this change.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In fact, this generates conflicts continuously as now, so please remove it and squash the commits

@moylop260
Copy link
Contributor

👍

@gurneyalex
Copy link
Member

@hbrunn rebase needed.

@hbrunn hbrunn force-pushed the 9.0-database_cleanup-purge_uninstalled branch from 05bab9e to d3365e1 Compare August 10, 2016 07:42
@hbrunn hbrunn force-pushed the 9.0-database_cleanup-purge_uninstalled branch from d3365e1 to e1d5737 Compare August 10, 2016 07:44
@hbrunn
Copy link
Member Author

hbrunn commented Aug 10, 2016

did someone force-push over the 9.0 branch? My local copy conflicted with it when fetching...

@gurneyalex
Copy link
Member

@hbrunn I think @pedrobaeza may have done so, yes (https://twitter.com/PedroMBaeza/status/761595556934410240)

@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Member

pedrobaeza commented Aug 10, 2016

Yes, I did. See #504

@hbrunn
Copy link
Member Author

hbrunn commented Aug 10, 2016

ah, thanks. Missed that while enjoying European High Culture: http://www.wacken.com ;-)

@hbrunn
Copy link
Member Author

hbrunn commented Aug 10, 2016

now investigating the CI issues, I have the feeling isolating this addon in the tests rather fixes a symptom than the cause

@gurneyalex
Copy link
Member

@hbrunn did you see #507 and #508?

@hbrunn
Copy link
Member Author

hbrunn commented Aug 10, 2016

@gurneyalex yes, thanks. But those work by isolating the module, and I'd like to find out what actually goes wrong in the first place.

@StefanRijnhart
Copy link
Member

👍 Any luck finding out the problem of testing this module in combination with other modules?

@StefanRijnhart StefanRijnhart merged commit 25f8bce into OCA:9.0 Aug 14, 2016
@hbrunn
Copy link
Member Author

hbrunn commented Aug 15, 2016

@StefanRijnhart yes, the test introduced in the offending commit caused the registry to be reloaded, with quite undefined behavior afterwards because at this point, there's no change signalling and no reloading. So I had to do some trickery to reload the registry, but not really: https://github.com/OCA/server-tools/pull/512/files

SiesslPhillip pushed a commit to grueneerde/OCA-server-tools that referenced this pull request Nov 20, 2024
Syncing from upstream OCA/server-tools (12.0)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants